The local Arabs of Acre did not embrace the new creed.

"Bahá'u'lláh's influence and renown among local Arabs was apparently considerable; however, they did not embrace the new creed. Nowadays there is not a single Bahá'í family of Arab origin in Acre. Local Arabs explain that at the time of Bahá'u'lláh's influence in Acre; in the competition between the Bahá'ís and the Shadliya, the latter predominated. Until now, Acre is a centre of the Shadliya."

(Erik Cohen, “The Baha'i Community of Acre”, Folklore Research Center Studies, vol. 3, 1972, pp. 119–141.)

It seems that not even the 'great majesty' of the 'Glory of God' in person convinced people from Acre of his claim as the new messenger of God. The Shadli's leadership was more convincing.

Read More

on some occasions Abdul Baha led the prayers in the mosque.

During the Mandatory period, the Bahá'ís of Acre, though considered a sect, remained firmly within the confines of Islam. 'Abdul Bahá himself, before he left Acre during the last years of the Ottoman rule, had the use of a separate room in the central mosque of Acre and on some occasions led the prayers in the mosque.

(Erik Cohen, “The Baha'i Community of Acre”, Folklore Research Center Studies, vol. 3, 1972, pp. 119–141.)

Read More

Bitter and spiteful attitudes within Baha'u'llah's own family

Sadly, I cannot do justice in providing a fair description of this religion, whose aim it is to unify the world, without taking note of the bitter and spiteful attitudes within Baha'u'llah's own family. One of Baha'u'llah's daughters challenged Shoghi Effendi's authority in court, but she was unsuccessful, partially because some of her key witnesses died, as Shoghi Effendi gleefully reported (Shoghi Effendi, Messages to the Baha'i World: 1950-57 [Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1971], p. 25). He communicated messages of delight whenever a tragedy struck anyone who opposed him (ibid., pp. 24-25, 54-55, 87-88). Toward the end of Shoghi Effendi's administration, there were few members of Baha'u'llah's extended family left who were not Covenant Breakers. Baha'u'llah had three wives (Asiyih, Fatimih and Gawhar). Of those, the second, Fatimih, was the mother of Muhammad Ali, who had opposed Abdul Baha. She and all of her offspring were declared to be Covenant Breakers for this and other reasons. Gawhar had one daughter, Furughiyyih, who, along with her husband, Siyyid Ali Afnan, was critical of Abdul Baha, thus qualifying her for expulsion. Asiyih Khanum had three children who survived into adulthood, but the daughter, Bahiyyih Khanum, chose lifelong celibacy, and the younger son, Mirza Mihdi, died of a fall when he was only twenty-two years old. That left Abdul Baha.

Abdul Baha had four daughters, of whom one, Munavvar Khanum, had no children, and the other two, Tuba Khanum and Ruha Khanum, earned the title of Covenant Breakers because they supported their children in various actions that were construed as defiance of Shoghi Effendi. All of Tuba's and Ruha's children, Shoghi Effendi's cousins, were stamped as Covenant Breakers. So, that left Shoghi Effendi's mother, Diya'iyyih Khanum, and her offspring. Shoghi Effendi had two sisters and two brothers. The sisters both married sons of the ostracized Furughiyyih and her husband, Siyyid Ali Afnan, thus giving cause for them to have to vacate the community, and the brothers, Husayn and Riad, were far from Shoghi Effendi's standards as well. He said of Husayn that he was "faithless" and guilty of "dishonorable conduct," and he referred to Riad as "treacherous" and "despicable," which clearly put them into the category of Covenant Breakers. In short, among the descendants of Baha'u'llah of Shoghi Effendi's generation, the great-grandchildren of Baha'u'llah, there was only one person who was not a Covenant Breaker, and that was Shoghi Effendi (ibid., p. 16).

Nonetheless, Shoghi Effendi won his lawsuits to the effect that he was the authorized leader of the Baha'i World Faith. All the various Covenant Breakers had to sign over all communal property in Iran, Iraq and Israel to his organization, and were expelled from Israel (ibid., p. 124).

-Neighboring Faiths - A Christian Introduction to World Religions (Winfried Corduan)

Read More

Messages of delight whenever a tragedy struck anyone who opposed him

He [Shoghi Effendi] communicated messages of delight whenever a tragedy struck anyone who opposed him...

(Ref. Shoghi Effendi, Messages to the Baha'i World: 1950-57 [Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1971], p. 24-25, 54-55, 87-88)

Read More

"Baha'is believe that the Faith has never been split into sects!"

Also, there's a little logic problem in Baha'i doctrine that has bothered me for a while. Baha'is believe that the Faith has never been split into sects (lasting ones, anyway), and will in fact remain basically undivided. But those groups that do separate from the mainstream of the Faith are declared non-Baha'is, simply because they separated. It's a semantic trick, no more. I'm sorry, but there are other Baha'i groups that do not consider the Universal House of Justice an authority. They do believe in Baha'u'llah (though not in the Covenant as we understand it, hence the term "Covenant-breakers"), so the rest of the world would consider them Baha'is. They consider themselves Baha'is too. Only mainstream Baha'is don't, and they have a powerful psychological motive for not doing so: the bedrock of their faith would be shaken if these breakaway groups were acknowledged as Baha'is.

This is very shaky ground for the claim that this faith is superior to Christianity and Islam, with respect to a lack of internal division. It also causes mainstream Baha'is to actively shun the company and opinions of certain other people who believe in Baha'u'llah; my soul tells me this is neither healthy nor just, and paradoxically, it makes the Faith less tolerant of diversity than many other religions.

And at some levels, what's really wrong with division, as long as it doesn't cause hatred or unloving behavior? I can choose to worship in a progressive church and still love conservative parishioners who leave to go someplace more suited to their beliefs. I can be an Episcopalian and still love my Unitarian and Catholic friends. (And my Muslim friends, and my Baha'i friends, and my Pagan friends, and so on!) I can even play Democrat to my Republican friends, or vice versa. It may be a little harder to understand where they're coming from, since I don't share their beliefs, but tests such as these are opportunities for intellectual and spiritual growth, not an indication that we need enforced uniformity of beliefs. I think what the world really needs is not a ban on divisions, but a spiritual discipline that prevents those divisions from causing hatred and prejudice.

(Letter to the LSA of Arlington, Massachusetts, by Jenifer Tidwell)
http://www.mit.edu/~jtidwell/letter_lsa.html

Read More

Conservative & Liberal Baha'is

While it is true that conservative Baha'is object to categorising Baha'is as liberals or conservatives, as gentle or hard-line, for a sociologist to suggest that such divisions do not exist in the community is frankly bizarre.

Conservative Baha'is believe it is wrong to criticise the Baha'i institutions publicly. They support the NSA's right to act as it pleases, even arbitrarily. They firmly support the demand that everything written by Baha'is about their religion be subject to in-house censorship ("literature review"). They believe the House of Justice is infallible in all its doings. They believe that women should not be allowed to serve on the Universal House of Justice. They are convinced that civil governments will eventually be supplanted by the Baha'i institutions, which will rule as a theocracy. Shunning heterodox Baha'is or "covenant breakers" is central to their religious identity. They are fiercely anti-intellectual and often consider independent thinking a sign of "covenant breaking". They are scriptural literalists, preferring any statement in the Baha'i scriptures to the findings of scientists or historians.

In contrast, liberal Baha'is believe that the Baha'i institutions are still embryonic and often act immaturely, and that criticising them for the arbitrary exercise of power is good and necessary. They tend to protest when a Baha'i governing body appears to over-reach its scriptural authority. They are uncomfortable with censorship and often quietly decline to cooperate with it. They believe the Universal House of Justice's authority to be limited to legislation, and admit the possibility that women will eventually serve on that body. They see Baha'i institutions as complementary to civil governments, and reject the belief in a future theocracy. They are uncomfortable with the practice of shunning. They admire the intellectual life, and are not afraid to think independently. They believe that where science and scripture are in apparent conflict, science should be preferred, and they generally reject a literalist approach to scripture.

(Juan R. I. Cole)

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1387523

Read More

The Babis of Zanjan rose in arms against the Qajar governor of the town.

May 5. On this date in 1850 the Bábis of Zanjan rose in arms against the Qajar governor of the town.

On March 20, 1848, Mullá Ḥusayn-i-Bushru'i, who in 1844 had become the first person to become a follower of the Báb, visited the Báb at Maku prison, where the Báb was incarcerated.

Subsequent to his visit, Mullá Ḥusayn-i-Bushru'i became involved in the Bábi uprisings. Under instructions from the Báb, on July 21, 1848, Mullá Ḥusayn-i-Bushru'i unfurled a Black Standard in Mashhad, fulfilling an Islamic prophecy, and began a march with other Bábis. They were rebuffed at Barfurush and therefore made defensive fortifications at the shrine of Shaykh Tabarsí. Mullá Ḥusayn-i-Bushru'i would die at the battle of Shaykh Tabarsí on February 2, 1849, but siege itself would last until May 10, 1849.

The Báb was later executed on July 9, 1850. Bábi uprisings would continue elsewhere in Iran, notably Neyriz and Zanjan.

Read More

British and Russians were seriously interested in the Babis

It is undeniable that the British and Russians were seriously interested in the Bābīs (as they were in any movement of potential significance in the Middle East at this period) and that later contacts between Bāhāʾīs and British and Russian government officials or missionaries were often cordial and of mutual benefit, but the sort of evidence that would lead to the far-reaching conclusions of the polemical literature is lacking.

------

Whatever the truth behind these events in Nūr and Tehran, the arrests and executions that followed the attempt on the Shāh’s life seem to have put an effective end to the Bābī network in that region. Mullā Shaykh ʿAlī Turshīzī ʿAzīm, ḥusayn Mīlānī, Ḥājj Sulaymān Khān Tabrīzī, Mīrzā Rafīʿ Nūrī, and the four men from Tākur mentioned above, all perished in the period immediately following the attempt. Subh-i Azal succeeded in escaping to Baghdad, where he was followed in 1853 by his brother Ḥusayn ʿAlī, who chose to go there after he had been released from prison in Tehran on the intervention of the Russian Minister.

-Denis MacEoin, The Messiah of Shiraz

Read More

Baha'i faith is a world religion not a Babi sect, Asiatic cult or offshoot of Shia Islam

Ceasing to designate to itself a movement, a fellowship and the like—designations that did grave injustice to its ever-unfolding system—dissociating itself from such appellations as Bábí sect, Asiatic cult, and offshoot of Shí‘ih Islám, with which the ignorant and the malicious were wont to describe it, refusing to be labeled as a mere philosophy of life, or as an eclectic code of ethical conduct, or even as a new religion, the Faith of Bahá’u’lláh is now visibly succeeding in demonstrating its claim and title to be regarded as a World Religion, destined to attain, in the fullness of time, the status of a world-embracing Commonwealth, which would be at once the instrument and the guardian of the Most Great Peace announced by its Author.

https://www.bahai.org/library/authoritative-texts/shoghi-effendi/world-order-bahaullah/11#088291543

Read More

mankind must suffer and be punished sufficiently to make it turn to God. - The UHJ

 '...All we know is that the Lesser and the Most Great Peace will come--their exact dates we do not know. The same is true as regards the possibility of a future war; we cannot state dogmatically it will or will not take place--all we know is that mankind must suffer and be punished sufficiently to make it turn to God.'

(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice, July 29, 1974)

Read More

The Lesser Peace - "It will be universal in the twentieth century."

The Lesser Peace in the Bahá’í Faith is a prophecy of political peace to be established by the nations of the world in order to bring about an end to war. Its establishment will prepare the way for the Most Great Peace, a condition of permanent peace and world unity to be founded on the spiritual principles and institutions of the World Order of Bahá’u’lláh and signalizing humanity's coming of age.

'Abdul-Bahá stated in 1912:

“Question: 'Are there any signs that the permanent peace of the world will be established in anything like a reasonable period?' ‘Abdu’l-Bahá was asked.

'It will be established in this century,' he answered, ‘It will be universal in the twentieth century. All nations will be forced into it.'"

(‘Abdu’l-Bahá in Canada” [Thornhill: Bahá’í Canada Publications, 1987])

In January 23, 1985, the Universal House of Justice sent a letter addressed "To all National Spiritual Assemblies" concerning Bahá’í activities for the International Year of Peace declared by the United Nations, in anticipation of the permanent peace of the world:

"Dear Bahá’í Friends,

1986 has been named the International Year of Peace by the United Nations. Considering the dangers surrounding mankind and the remedial prospects of the Lesser Peace to which Bahá’u’lláh has summoned the nations, we embrace this God-sent opportunity to proclaim ever more widely and convincingly the vitalizing principles upon which, as our Teachings emphatically assert, a lasting peace must be founded."

So the 20th century has gone and the prophecy failed miserably. Now they just do mental gymnastic to twist all these information saying the Lesser Peace is ongoing.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/txprju/oops_something_went_wrong_with_your_prophecy/

https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/10hflg3/universal_peace_quotes_by_20th_century/

Read More

"the Guardian expected obedience to dictates from afar, but accepted us as the members of the community..."

"Whatever real reasons he had, neither I, nor Hassan, or our respective families, have learnt. For all of us, it simply cast a shadow that we could have done without, reminding us that even when cast out of the Cause, the Guardian expected obedience to dictates from afar, issued by someone who neither accepted us as members of the community nor granted us any recognition of basic human rights."

(Bahiyeh Shahid, great-granddaughter of Baha'u'llah)

https://web.archive.org/web/20210503025617/https://www.abdulbahasfamily.org/zia-khanum/shoghi-effendi/

Read More

"back-biting is forbidden"

Baha'is say their prejudiced attitude is only towards covenant breakers but it extends to people who criticize the Faith or leave the Faith also.

The whole "back-biting is forbidden" thing doesn't apply to people designated as "enemies" who will get blasted from pillar to post for all their character flaws (real or imagined) as soon as Baha'is feel they have the greenlight to destroy someone for going against their collective.

It seems deeply hypocritical until one accepts the only real principle in the Faith is that whatever the Head of the Faith deems moral and right is moral and right, individual conscience and opinion is meaningless. It's just an autocratic authoritarian theocratic regime, not a philosophical system.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exbahai/comments/uh8pq9/do_bahais_still_love_covenant_breakers/

Read More

‘shake their faith in what?’

Dr. Moojan Moomen, a well informed, well established writer on Bahai history and Bahai matters, has official permission from the House of Justice to come and visit us. At a recent meeting on December 5, 2011 he made a statement that prompted me to write the following letter to him on April 3, 2012:

Dear Dr. Momen:

Towards the end of our last meeting you said something that has remained with me. You thought that if Baha’is should listen to me and to what I had to say it would shake their faith. The next day, — it took me a few hours of sleep to recover from our absorbing, eight hour session — the question came to mind: ‘shake their faith in what?’ Could any amount of talking anyone heard from me or Hassan shake anyone’s faith in the core principles, ideals, or world view of the Bab or Bahaullah? Could anything you have heard us say shake a Baha’i’s faith in the definition of a Baha’i? In the purpose and goal of a Baha’i’s existence; the end towards which he should strive; the compassion, love and understanding with which he should seek to serve humanity; the ingrained spirituality and godliness that should be his guiding light; the responsibility, kindness and forgiveness that can move mountains and build a new world? Have you ever heard Hassan or I say anything that would shake a Baha’i’s faith in any of these?

What might shake their faith is the discrepancy between the ‘facts’ as they are compiled and presented on the internet, on sources such as Bahai Library on-line, Bahaikepedia, the planned Bahai encyclopedia, a variety of articles, and what actually happened. In my humble opinion, it would serve the Cause far better if more care is taken to make sure that these ‘facts’ were actually factual. In fact it would be much better to do without a great many of these articles and compilations altogether. What are you afraid of? Why does the Cause require so much fending off of ‘enemies’? They have always been there and will probably always be there. But does a Cause such as this need anything more than the luminous message it brought? Does it need ‘propaganda’ beyond its own words of wisdom and spiritual enlightenment?

Historians allowed too many witnesses and participants in the events of the time to die without interviewing a single one of them, or finding out firsthand what actually happened, how and why. They were so busy categorizing covenant breakers and shunning them that history passed them by. What you are now left with are regurgitated accounts of events that often have little to do with how things actually were.

The Guardian, Shoghi Effendi, held the will of Abdul Baha aloft and with what he interpreted as the Master’s blessings, set out to make the institution of Guardianship a jewel mounted in a framework of complete conformity, total obedience and unswerving loyalty to the authority heading the Cause, whether the Guardian or the Universal House of Justice — not forgetting that together they were divinely guided and infallible. However, like all man-run institutions, no matter how sacred in origin, these are stepping stones in a certain direction, not eternal edifices never to be questioned or changed. Maybe when you said I or Hassan could shake a Baha’i’s faith you meant faith in what these institutions brought forth, did or decided, notwithstanding their infallibility. If a Bahai believes in all this what would shake his faith: my words or what in his/her name and the name of the Bahai Faith, is being said to the world now on the internet, — coming from official Baha’i sources? Ironically, what is put on the internet — that ‘curse’ as you called it — should, considering how many ‘enemies, battles, conflicts, expellees, covenant breakers, faithless, disloyal, treacherous, arch-enemies, plotters and schemers are mentioned, all relating to the family of Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi, be enough to shake anyone’s faith. And that is exactly what I am talking about. If you wish to hang the families of Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi like washing on a line on the internet, at least have your facts right. I do not believe it serves any cause, leave alone the Cause of Bahaullah to have the names of the descendants of Abdul Baha and the immediate family of the Guardian so besmirched with mud, which, upon closer scrutiny, simply does not stick. When one fact is shown to be incorrect it casts doubt on the whole body of work. How much more when ‘fact’ after ‘fact’ is not correct?

That is what shakes a believer’s faith. When those who should know better ignore the truth, a truth that always, somehow, has the habit of putting on an appearance.

Sincerely,

Bahiyeh Afnan Shahid

https://web.archive.org/web/20190430172739/http://www.abdulbahasfamily.org/ 

Read More

14 facts about the Baha'i Faith that any bahá'í will ever tell you!

1- The Bab revealed a series of bizarre laws in the Bayan: The rich should live in a 9 sided house; It's forbidden to read books without permission; reprinting of books after 37 and 200 years; never tear up letters; prohibition on the study of dead languages etc.

2- Many writings of The Bab are crystal clear that his dispensation was expected to last a long time (he reveals laws to sultans and kings who would embrace his faith) as well as he says that the next manifestation only will come after the complete fulfillment of his revelation and laws. Nonetheless, he was killed in the 6th year of his dispensation and Mirza Husayn Ali declared himself "Bahá'u'lláh" 3 years later.

3- The Bab appointed explicitly Subh-i-Azal as his successor and wrote him many tablets blessing his authority and explaining that whosoever opposes him, this would be opposing God.

4- It's no coincidence that none of these tablets (not even the Bayan) were officially translated to English (the translation by scholars are not officially approved) and all that have been published and came up to the public are only the "Selection from the writings of The Bab" and the notes from Shoghi Effendi (that are totally incompatible with the expected in the Bab's writings).

5- The Bab allowed his followers to marry a maximum of 2 wives but Bahá'u'lláh disrespected this and married 3 women. Later, his 2nd and 3rd wives and all her sons and relatives were abruptly excommunicated.

6- In the Kitab-i-Aqdas Bahá'u'lláh prescribed death penalty, specially death by burning: "Should anyone intentionally destroy a house by fire, him also shall ye burn."; and ordained to mark the thieves on the forehead: "on the third offence, place ye a mark upon his brow so that, thus identified, he may not be accepted in the cities of God and His countries. Beware lest, through compassion, ye neglect to carry out the statutes of the religion of God" .

7- 'Abdul-Bahá was initially worshiped by bahá'ís as if he was a sort of divinity. This is often seen in the old pictures of the first Bahá'í communities where the frame of the Maximum Name is sided with a frame written "Ya 'Abdul-Bahá" in Persian style calligraphy. Due this omission from 'Abdul-Bahá' over the cult of personality practiced on himself by many believers, his brother, Muhammad Ali, started to contest him firmly.

8- Before the passing of Shoghi Effendi, in 1957, the continuity of the Guardianship was totally expected and Shoghi Effendi was often referred as being "the first Guardian", as well as people frequently talked about the "lineage of guardians". After his passing the bahá'í books who brought up these expressions had their texts changed or removed, especially the well known book "Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era".

9- Shoghi Effendi did not write a Will and Testament disrespecting a bahá'í law and this created a big mess over the right of the successorship in the Faith, that later was completely stifled.

10- Shoghi Effendi excommunicated almost all of his relatives including his siblings and his parents. He even ordered exhuming the remains of Diya'u'llah who was buried next to his father Baha'u'llah in Bahji. He rejoiced at the death of his opponents, the so called covenant-breakers.

11- There are reports about Shoghi Effendi being closeted Homosexual, but he considered homosexuality immoral, a distortion of human nature and a handicap to be overcomed through the advice and help of doctors! The Universal House of Justice confirmed this observance stating that homosexuality is a sexual problem and a condition to which a person should not be reconciled with.

12- The Bahá'í Faith has schismatic groups. Despite the attempt to cast out any other group that does not follow the authority of the Universal House of Justice in call themselves "bahá'ís", and trademark all the bahá'ís symbols, a lawsuit in 2006 determined that these schismatic groups can call themselves bahá'ís and to use the holy symbols, recognizing them officially as bahá'ís following another leadership. Some of these groups are: Orthodox Bahá'í Faith, Bahá'ís Under the Provision of the Covenant, Free Bahá'ís, Unitarian Bahá'ís etc.

13- Without a Guardian to appoint additional Hands of Cause, it was created a bizarre situation where the "equality of men and women" was put aside as the Universal House of Justice, the highest institution in the Bahá'í Faith, cannot elect female members, so the reins of the religion is taken exclusively by men.

14- The election results of the Universal House of Justice are pre-determined as the new members are generally elected from the appointed institutions of the own Bahá’í administration, specially the International Teaching Centre. All of the current members of the Universal House of Justice previously served as members of the International Teaching Centre. Additionally, with no politicking or partisanship allowed, there is little turnover in leadership and the members of the Universal House of Justice almost invariably serve until retirement or death.

Read More